On 09/26/2011 04:31 PM, Henrik Friedrichsen wrote:
On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 11:17 PM, wwguy<wey-yi.w.guy@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
how about just doing a flood ping to your AP
#sudo ping -f<AP's ip address>
Okay, here's what's happening:
~> ping -f fritz.box
PING fritz.box (192.168.178.1) 56(84) bytes of data.
ping: cannot flood; minimal interval, allowed for user, is 200ms
When I send regular pings:
~> ping -c5 fritz.box
PING fritz.box (192.168.178.1) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from fritz.box (192.168.178.1): icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=1.31 ms
64 bytes from fritz.box (192.168.178.1): icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=1.26 ms
64 bytes from fritz.box (192.168.178.1): icmp_req=3 ttl=64 time=1.30 ms
64 bytes from fritz.box (192.168.178.1): icmp_req=4 ttl=64 time=2.51 ms
64 bytes from fritz.box (192.168.178.1): icmp_req=5 ttl=64 time=1.22 ms
--- fritz.box ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 32046ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 1.226/1.524/2.515/0.496 ms
As you can see, the packets get there and the response goes back to
me. But it seems to take ages for the package to be sent. I've sent
five pings and got my response back in regular latency, however the
whole process took 32 seconds.
Of course, it should take a little over 4 sec. Try adding the -D switch to the
ping command. Does repeating the ping command immediately change the timing?
Larry
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
